"I went to Jerusalem to become acquainted (Gk. istoria) with Cephas" - Paul's words from Galatians 1:18.

Forcibly Removing All the Tulips at SWBTS

Dr. Paige Patterson met with professors in the theology school at SWBTS and implied the seminary would be letting go the Calvinist professors from the seminary, claiming that the lack of funds and the need to reduce faculty as the rationale for the impending releases. Odd, however, was the seemingly chosen method of reduction. It was not years of service, nor even the performance of the professors, but rather, administration sought to ascertain just who on the faculty were avowed "tulip" men, and those are the ones being let go. Some of the professors present at the meeting included men who specifically informed administration of their beliefs at the time of their hiring, and they were told at the time their beliefs were not a problem.

But it seems Calvinism is a problem to the powers that be at SWBTS. At least one professor from the philosophy department, himself on the brink of release, was present. The professors faced a grilling as to their soteriological belief system. They were asked to declare how many points of Calvinism to which they ascribed, and an even more penetrating series of questions were posed to that unfortunate soul who had the temerity to say "four" or "five" points.

Historically, dismissals at SWBTS have taken the backdoor approach of "You have a year to find a job," but the rough economic environment might speed that process up just a tad for these tulip men. Here's hoping they can make it through the spring.

Of course, it is the perogative of the SWBTS President to release whomsoever he will, but the forced, imminent departure of Calvinists from SWBTS illustrates just how far we have come since ideologues, who can't handle dissent, have taken charge of the Southern Baptist Convention.

245 comments:

It's sad for anyone to lose a job, but this kind of criterion for dismissal is really sad. They were hired and it wasn't a problem, they shouldn't be released for their belief system. Tenure and experience should play in.

What do you expect? When one is consumed with the arrogancy that his personal intepretations of Scripture are always an accurate and full represention of God's truth, then that individual will act logically (in his mind) and dismiss anyone who is in disagreement with God.

Wade,I am saddened once again by the news of what is happening at SWBTS. As an alumni of the Theology Department I can't help but think of Dr. Curtis Vaughn. He was revered and loved by many of us who learned so much from him in his challenging Greek classes. He was so good at what he did he was asked to come out of retirement on more than one occasion, if memory serves me correctly. To think that if he were still at SWBTS he would be fired just because he was a Calvinist, something he never hid from his students, but never forced on us either, is just unbelievable.

At the beginning of every semester, as long as he was alive, Dr. Naylor, would speak to the incoming students and tell them that they had better rather die than to ever disgrace the name of Southwestern. Yet is that not exactly what this is a disgrace to the very name of Southwestern and done no less by its very own President.

This is not the beloved Southwestern that I remember and will forever cherish. Just one question: Is the Southwestern we all loved dead?

Lovin' the way some are automatically questioning Wade's integrity - as if he is lying on a blog that EVERYONE having anything to do with SBC - including those that deem themselves watchdogs - visit at least once every time he posts. Motivations of some seem to be suspect...

You could always secretly fund the Pansy Crew to plant a few Tulips around campus just for fun!

I'm not a Calvinist, but I find this behavior unacceptable. As an alumni, I know several of my professors were Calvinists and yet somehow I was able to make it through "unscathed". My education was not harmed.

To think that conformity is valued over orthodoxy (of which Calvinists still qualify), liberty and multiple perspectives, is sad.

What's next, will those who disagree with a certain eschatology be next? Will SWBTS turn into a Dispensationalists only seminary like DTS?

Just wondering, what could this do to Southwestern's accreditation status?

Bye, Bye Dr. Curtis Vaughn who was considered by many to be one of the four greatest Greek scholars in the world. Back in the days when all our seminary hours had to be on campus for there were no extension classes I was privileged to take eighteen hours of classes under him.

In many of the advanced classes it was not unusual for Dr. Vaughan to bring a volume of Spurgeon to class and spend the first fifteen or twenty minutes finishing reading one of Spurgeon's sermons that he was reading before coming to class. It was from Dr. Vaughan that I learned to love the "Prince of Pulpiteers."

If this had happened when Dr. Vaughan was at SWBTS, there would have been a revolution on Campus. We were revolutionary any way—the Civil Rights marches and the anti-Vietnam marches—"Those were the days, my friend. We thought they would never end."

I am afraid that SWBTS is no longer a Southern Baptist Seminary if what you write is true. I even wonder whether the Southern Baptist Conventions is any longer the Southern Baptist Convention. How very, very sad.

This has to be a joke. The moment I read this I knew that this could not be true.

Perhaps you have some kind of grand point to make, Wade, but I would suggest that you make it in the same post in which you play the game. This is what Jerry Corbaley did over his tongues posts and it was very upsetting. He said that he was trying to make a point, but in reality, he was just lying and failed miserably in his attempt. Please tell me that you are not doing this.

They might not all be five-pointers, but there were many one-on-one meetings that took place between Patterson and individual members of the faculty to determine where the faculty stood on the doctrines of grace.

...and to those that are doubting the veracity of Wade's post, sadly enough, this is true.

When I first read your post this evening, I was shocked and horrified. I tried to go to sleep, but here it is after 2am, and I cannot get to sleep.

Let me just say it straight: you need to repent of your lies and slanders against Dr. Patterson and SWBTS. Failing that, you need to repent of an extremely bad and ill-timed joke. I'll let you clarify which it will be.

I am a five-point Calvinist and I have taught at SWBTS as elected faculty for six years. It is a privilege for me to work under Dr. Patterson's leadership. I also know all of the other five-point Calvinists on SWBTS faculty.

There was no group meeting of faculty yesterday, in which we were all told we were fired, for our Calvinism or otherwise. That is a lie. No Calvinists have been fired.

You talk about "professors present at the meeting". There was no such meeting yesterday. Or the day before. Or the day before.

There is no "forced, imminent departure of Calvinists from SWBTS." What is your evidence that any Calvinists have in fact been fired?

I assure you: if something like this had happened, I would be one of the first to know.

And what is this claim that, at this alleged group meeting of faculty yesterday, "At least one professor from the philosophy department, himself on the brink of release, was present"? As far as I know, I am the only five-point Calvinist faculty member in the philosophy department, and again, there was no meeting yesterday in which we were told we were fired.

Please, Wade: retract this post, and tell us that you henceforth will repent from posting unsubstantiated rumors.

P.P. has been cleaning out the seminaries, and other agencies of the SBC for what...25+ years now? No news here. P.P. believes he alone understands every jot and tittle. Now 5-point Calvinism...he may have something to groan about there?

rex ray, i admire your passion and partially agree with you but you are off topic...I'm with wade too but I want to hear how he responds to welty before I jump behind this "firing calvinists deal" (which I ain't one).

Not sure why "girls" not posting is an indication of anything, but this "girl" thought this was a (bad) joke leading to a point.

I am relieved that Greg Welty and Scott Lamb are saying this is the case, since I would be shocked if Paige Patterson let professors go on account of their 5-point Calvinism. He may have expressed his views from the pulpit on the matter, but he is friends with Dr. Mohler and other 5-pointers.

If Wade was saying, with his comment about Patterson passing over credentials and service, that people are treating Calvinism as if it's the Alpha and Omega of the Christian life, I agree that some are (though many are not). It's a danger, though, that we can fall into (I speak as one who's been there).

" This is what Jerry Corbaley did over his tongues posts and it was very upsetting. He said that he was trying to make a point, but in reality, he was just lying and failed miserably in his attempt. Please tell me that you are not doing this."

It is true. Wade. You were the most vocal among us when Jerry lied. You said it was akin to blasphemy.

I don't know if we can call this blasphemy. But, it is evident your hypocrisy has progressed to the point it knows no boundaries.

Wade, it is time to lay down this sword of bitterness and shield of deceit and repent of this vendetta and walk away.

Wade has yet to clarify if this is true or if he is just making a point.

The biggest problem I see with this is that it is all too believable, all too consistent with past behavior of PP's leadership of SWBTS.

If this accusation had been made about Ken Hemphill, I would be shocked and not believe it without proof. Sadly, I am more inclined to believe it (the judge and call for justice in me rearing its ugly head) about PP because of how he has acted over the years.

I hope this is not true. If it is just a point, I don't like it in part because of what it brings out in me, mostly because of its abuse of truth and unwarranted damage to reputation.

Anonymous said:"Where are all the "girls gone wild"? Where are all the no name anonymous nonsense stats and ridiculous quotes? Do the girls care about making sure we get our theology right as this post deals with? Or is it only women's issues that they care about?"

First of all, Anomymous, these are chauvinistic questions. I'm just now reading Wade's post for the first time and this "girl" as you identify us is concerned about what may be happening at SWBTS.

I'm waiting for Wade's response to Greg Welty, who currently serves on the faculty at SWBTS.

Obviously, Southwestern is going to have to make huge budget cuts due to declining enrollment and negative economic factors. I guess in the coming months, some of the male faculty at SWBTS will be able to identify with what Dr. Klouda experienced. I'm grateful she found a position at another institution of higher learning.

Ok, first of all I am ROFLL after reading some of these comments. Granted, the post doesn't come out and say it's a joke but come on, people. The point of this post is "People who applaud the disfellowshipping of Decatur-FBC better watch out---they might decide to disfellowship you, too, if they don't like what you believe".

I'm a five pointer myself and if Paige "Foghorn Leghorn" Patterson did in fact decide to do this I guess it would be his decision to make however stupid it was. It would not change the fact that if a state convetion decides to disfellowship from a church with a woman pastor they have the right to do that. I have said and say here again I appreciate the GBC for doing what they're doing in that situation.

Oh, and if this was a post just to make the point that you shouldn't narrow the parameters of being a Baptist too narrow or you might find yourself on the outside I submit you should have made that clear after the post. I knew this wasn't to be taken seriously but apparently some folks didn't find that it was obviously satire. I'd leave writing Christian satire to the cats at Tom-in-the-Box.

It's been CLEAR since 1994 that SWBTS is NOT the school it was when I attended there--not even close to the good school it was then.

I'm not a 5-point Calvinist (instead, a "modified Calvinist"--which means a "modified Arminius"--just like 99% of the rest of SBC folk), but I loved Dr. Vaughn. At the end of his tenure, it would've been easier to fire the president of SWBTS than to fire Dr. Vaughn (as a matter of fact, it WAS easier; shortly later, though, Dr. Vaughn was appointed to the committee seeking the seminary's next president, who was Ken Hemphill).

If I were Wade, I would NOT sit beside my computer waiting for ANY of you to chime in regarding my postings; I'd respond to your comments as my time permitted--so give Wade a chance to do so. If after 3 years of reading here, you DON'T believe that Wade will do what's right OR post what's right as he knows it, then you need to go read some other blogsite (some of your should do that anyway!).

I have read in Timmy Brister's blog (but I am unable to find now), that he suggested it would be a good idea for people to come together and help the "fired" Calvinist staff in churches and place them in temporary jobs or in new church plantings.

Maybe they need to do this to the seminary staff who are Calvinists being let go.

But if you will look back at the other posts, if there is a woman's issue involved the comments do get to 100 awfully fast.

Marie - Jim Hamilton is somewhat of a friend of mine and if I'm not mistaken you might want to check with him at the best seminary (that would be Southern). I think that's where he is now. Whether he still keeps up with the goings on at SW'ern is not known.

You, my friend, deserve a response. Please hear my heart. Sometimes words over the internet do not convey a sense of compassion, and I feel a great deal of empathy for you.

When I wrote that IMB trustees were out to get Rankin's job, and Paige Patterson was orchestrating his friends who were IMB trustees to push the tongues policy as a backdoor attempt to fire Rankin, IMB trustee leadership screamed bloody murder. They called me a liar, a slanderer, and sought to remove me from the board. Interestingly enough, the week after the IMB trustees passed the new "doctrinal" policies (November 2005), Dr. Patterson wrote Dr. Rankin an email that suggested Rankin step down since his own trustees had turned against him. I have, on tape, Dr. Tom Hatley telling me trustees were ready to make the motion that the office of the presidency of the IMB be vacated. Fortunately for Rankin (or "unfortunately" depending on your feelings toward him), I became the issue at the IMB and his job was saved. And that is not my opinion, that is what the former chairman of the board told me (and, yes, I have it on tape).

When Patterson told all the female professors at SWBTS that their "jobs were safe," when he became President of SWBTS, everyone relaxed. That is, until Dr. Sheri Klouda was informed that she "needed to look elsewhere" for a job because she was a "woman in a position reserved for a man." Sheri Klouda lost her job - she was never offered another "permanent" position on the faculty at SWBTS. She would have accepted it had it been offered because of her husband's health and her daughter's education in the metroplex. I did not know about her situation until after she was gone. Again, I was called every name in the book. People questioned my integrity. Baptist Identity people said I was lying about Sheri Klouda.

Ask Sheri Kouda what she thinks of Wade Burleson. Ask Sheri Klouda what her husband and daughter think of Wade Burleson. I think you may find that they believe the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth was told by Wade Burleson. And, Sheri may very well tell you that her daughter's faith in Southern Baptists was restored through the help they received through our church.

Now, Greg, you are wondering whether what I write may or may not be true? I would suggest that if you felt confident that I was untruthful, you would have slept like a baby.

If Calvinists at SWBTS are not released in order to reduce the number of faculty, then I would suggest that maybe you have me to thank for letting intentions be known. If, as has been indicated, people like you are released, don't say that I didn't warn you.

Either way, rest assured that I do not write what I write in a vacuum. I've been around the block in terms of this blog, and everything I write is done intentionally, to wake people up to what is happening in the SBC.

And, what is happening, is a purging of anyone who is not in agreement with a particular ecclesiological, soteriological, and eshcatological viewpoint.

The day of dissent for Southern Baptists is over, unless more people like myself challenges leadership.

I agree that P.P. has done some things that are a little difficult to justify, but having attended SEBTS I find it hard to believe that P.P. would do this, in fact, I cannot believe it. Half the professors I had at SEBTS were 5 pointers, and who brought them there? Paige did. Paige is not the madman many are making him out to be. I'm with CB on this one, let's cut the slander out of this post, and be a little more edifying to the body, which I'm sure Paige is a part of.Robert

Wade said:"The day of dissent for Southern Baptists is over, unless more people like myself challenges leadership."

Wade,

I greatly appreciate how you are challenging the SBC hierarchy. I commented months ago on this blog that I am a Southern Baptist who is at the end of her rope. For the time being, I have tied a knot at the end of the rope, and I've been holding on for dear life!

I have been educating myself over the last several months about the direction the SBC seems to be taking with regard to doctrinal issues, and the knot is beginning to loosen.

When I joined a Southern Baptist church 10 years ago, I thought each church acted independently but came together in the SBC in order to promote missions. That no longer appears to be the case.

I appreciate what you are doing to awaken the slumbering SBCers, but I fear it may be too late. In short order my family may be leaving the SBC if things don't begin to move from the far right. We feel as though we no longer "fit" within the SBC.

Your response to Dr. Welty does not account for the fact that you lied about a faculty meeting. If your goal was to expose a plot, fine. But you can do that without lying about meetings that never took place.

Your propensity for red herrings is disheartening. You did not address Dr. Welty's statements and instead of defending your own and refuting his, you diverted the argument to the "dead horses" of Rankin and Klouda.

Moreover, in this post, as in many others, you provide no substantiation or evidence for your claims whatsoever. I assume you'll chalk that up to "protecting sources," but it still does nothing to change the fact that when it comes to your modus operandi, this post is merely "same song, different verse."

Unless you can prove your assertions (and it appears you are either unable or unwilling to do so), your blog is nothing more than a gossip rag, the likes of which sit on magazine racks at the supermarket counter, beckoning to gullible housewives.

Can you give us the name and email address of the Chairman of the Board at SWBTS? We graduates need to write him since I know they do at least listen to some of the alumni (or at least the ones who give money.)

Secondly, wide parameters, narrow parameters, no parameters; the key is that those who desire cooperation simply do just that "cooperate." I detest the end game of the theology of Arminianism, but it is not my place to tell those outside my care how to evangelize the lost..."whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice."

So, honestly a narrowing of parameters does not get me too upset. Sin always has a way of liberaling things up a bit.

I am presently reading a history of the SBC by W. W. Barnes. It is a history from 1845-1953. Let me tell you Wanda, discord is not new to this age. Barnes, while admitting that slavery did have its impact upon the formation of the SBC, also acknowledges the fact that those in power of the pre-convention "American Baptist Home Mission Society" placed missionaries on the field to the neglect of certain states and certain associations. Yes, politics were alive and well then as well. Barnes writes, "The [SBC] arose out of the current American conflict over slavery, but, behind the immediate occasion arising out of the slavery issue, there were fundamental disagreements over home missions and differing conceptions of the nature of Baptist General bodies." (Broadman Press, 1954, p.98)

There is nothing new under the sun said another wise man. Our issues are the same old issues. Our sins are the same old sins. We are a people of Adam who desire power and control. We can even fix this generation, but the next will have to learn is all over for themselves--in Christ--we can only pray.

Anyone who desires a return to the "glory days" of the SBC living in a pipe dream. For the glory days were but a slice of the greater work of the Kingdom full of pain and strife and change.

The alternative however, as Barnes writes, was a national ecclesiastical body. Early SBC Founders rejected the idea of forming a "denomination." Would they be proud of our "Southern Baptist Denomination?"

Would we have been better off under the control of an American Baptist Presbytery?

"Ask Sheri Kouda what she thinks of Wade Burleson. Ask Sheri Klouda what her husband and daughter think of Wade Burleson. I think you may find that they believe the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth was told by Wade Burleson. And, Sheri may very well tell you that her daughter's faith in Southern Baptists was restored through the help they received through our church."

Burleson: ... but the forced... departure of Calvinists ... illustrates ... how ... ideologues, who can't handle dissent, have taken charge of the Southern Baptist Convention.

bapticus hereticus: and Calvinist ideologues and their present-day counter ideologues (i.e., Patterson et al.) did not previously remove non-inerrantists from the SBC? why complain now; isn't it just another manifestation of the trajectory both sides agreed to a few decades back?

In the case of the arrogance which has been demonstrated by a certain individual and now continues, perhaps one can quote the following: “...the image of the Lord had been replaced by a mirror.” Jorge Luis Borges

The treatment of so many has been so brutal, is anyone now surprised?At least professors know they are on the 'chopping block' if they DARE to believe differently from their master.

After all, they went along with the treatment of others, thinking they were safe. There is no safety from a tyrant.

Give up your dignity and integrity to keep your security: you ride the back of the tiger.

Safety and security in this world ?

Better to become a man of honor and integrity and keep your soul.At least you survive intact.

Concerning CB. Him and I have done battle with and against each other. Your comments on him are totally off. I have never witnessed anything duplicitous about CB whether in agreement or in disagreement with him.

I stood with Wade on the IMB issue. It why I started blogging years ago. I argued on all sorts of blogs that Dr. Patterson and Hatley and Corbaley and Floyd were leading the SBC in the wrong direction.

I still believe what I wrote. I am still glad I contacted Tom Hatley and John Floyd to ask them to stop what they were doing.

But somewhere along the line, Wade jumped the shark.

Time will tell. If Wade is right about this, we owe him an apology for doubting his veracity.

But if Wade is wrong, he should do as CB and Dr. Welty have requested - repent and STOP!

I know very few People who have more Integrity than Dr. Greg Welty who responded to this Lie being told on your Blog. You always ask for proof as to the Truth of what is said. Please respond to what Dr. Greg Welty said about this Lie. Dr. Paige Patterson has been wrong on a lot of things, but I will put Him above what you are accusing Him of doing. I wish there were more Paige Patterson’s in this world to defend the Truth of God’s Holy Word.

"Unless you can prove your assertions (and it appears you are either unable or unwilling to do so), your blog is nothing more than a gossip rag, the likes of which sit on magazine racks at the supermarket counter, beckoning to gullible housewives."

If you were just Half the Man of God that CB Scott is and has been in Defense of the Truth and what God’s Word says, you might deserve to be heard. You also might be able to be compared to the Real Dr Phil of TV fame.

You have presented your Calvinistic beliefs loud and clear on this blog, so I know your theological bent. I merely used the rope analogy to explain how I feel as a Southern Baptist.

I wholeheartedly believe in the sovereignty of God. I think He has placed me in the SBC for a time to show me some very important things. If and when I leave the SBC, I believe it will be according to His will. I'm praying for divine guidance.

One point.......Malcolm Yarnell said there was no litmus test against Calvinist at Southwestern. I think it was at the building bridges conference!.This would make him a liar too. Now I disagree alot with Mr Yarnell...but a liar I dont find him.

When I first saw this post and the picture, I really thought it would be a critique of a new landscape plan that SWBTS had embarked on - To replace all the Tulips with Blue Bonnets (isn't that the Texas State flower).

After reading the post and the comments, it's impossible to sort out.

The post is odd.

Dr. Welty's denial is straightforward (but others say he just doesn't know yet), and Wade's response is evasive and cryptic.

It's as if some blogger created a post saying that he had inside information that Wade was gay. And that Wade hired Ben Cole for a while because Ben was gay, too.

Then, someone from the staff of Wade's church would claim that Wade and Ben are not gay.

But others said, "you may not know the whole truth."

Thus allowing the person intially posting the story to claim simultaneously:

1. The story is true, just wait.

2. The story is not true, but I was mislead.

3. The posting of the story actually stopped Wade and Ben from being gay because it outed their propensities in public before they acted, and thus spared them and the church from the horror that "could" have happened.

4. The story proves a bigger point about gay ministers and how we must watch to see that there are none in our churches and posting stories such as this have the intended effect.

VIEWER ADVISORY

The preceding story is just that - an story. None of the facts are true. It was written as a hypothetical.

I have no information that Wade, Ben or anyone else on this blog is gay, and this comment was not written to prove or imply that. Again, it is a hypothetical.

Just FYI--I honestly thought this post was a spoof. I didn't think you were lying just using satire to make a point. I haven't the foggiest notion of what's going on at SWBTS with Paige "Ducky Wucky" Patterson so I sure couldn't say whether you're telling the truth or not.

1) The story is true. In that case, there are a lot of people who will defend the establishment and refuse to believe the truth, at all costs.

2) The story is not true. In which case there are a lot of people who are willing climb on the bandwagon of condemnation of all things SWBTS, SBC,et al.

John 17:19-23, KJV: "And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me."

Ah, he sweet smell of oneness.

Jesus knows the deal, whatever it is, and I imagine He's a lot more concerned about oneness than He is about the blog post.

I too am disturbed that you did not really answer Greg's challenge about the issue of whether or not "Paige Patterson met with professors in the theology school at SWBTS and implied the seminary would be letting go the Calvinist professors from the seminary, claiming that the lack of funds and the need to reduce faculty as the rationale for the impending releases."

Greg has objected that this is not true, but you have not answered this objection with any facts to substantiate your statement. Instead you have argued that, since you have been right in the past when you have set forth similar kinds of charges, then we ought to just trust that you are right this time as well. But I think this is asking too much. One should never state charges against and brother unless he is willing able to prove them when he states them.

Even if you turn out to be right (which I doubt given Greg's challenge), it still doesn't mean that you were right to set forth unsubstantiated charges.

NKJ 1 Timothy 5:19-20 "19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. 20 Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear."

Patterson is a leader among the SBC brethren and deserves to be treated with this kind of respect, whether or not you like his behavior or theology. I am waiting for you "two or three witnesses."

At any rate, I for one am greatly disturbed by your post whether or not it turns out to be true. It is causing undue distress to the brethren regardless and is tempting them to make judgments about a brother's character and actions that may not be true - whether your character and actions, or those of Patterson and Welty. And all with no factual basis set forth at all. Is this really the way we Christians ought to behave?

(1). First, those who comment and are angry about the potential dismissal of SWBTS Calvinists.

Where was your anger over women being terminated at SWBTS because of their gender (Klouda and Bullock). Where was your wrath when the head of SWBTS was seeking the removal of another SBC entity head? Why are you all of the sudden now angry? Is it because the forced removals are now hitting close to home?

(2). Second, to those who are casting doubt on the integrity of the messenger.

Has anyone apologized to Wade for accusing him of not telling the truth at the IMB? Has anyone actually called Sheri Klouda and asked her if Wade's version of the story is true?

I spoke to Sheri Kluoda just three months ago. She categorically informed me, without hesitation or equivocation, that everything written about her situation by Wade Burleson was true.

It seems to me those of you who are shouting "Liar" at Wade Burleson have forgotten he's batting a thousand percent.

Ben served at Emmanuel under a one year signed contract between his last pastorate and an impending move to Washington D.C. He completed his one year of service six months ago (August 2008) and has moved to D.C. and is now working in politics.

So, honestly a narrowing of parameters does not get me too upset. Sin always has a way of liberaling things up a bit.

While in a certain way strictly true, the addition of rules to biblical mandates is perceived as a conserative affliction, not a liberal one. Hence our perception that the Pharisees of Jesus's day were "conservatives" because they were creating thickets of hedge rules to prevent sin against the Law itself.

That conservatism is with respect to the priests, scribes and teachers of the Law who in order to maintain their position were moderates in their acceptance of Roman rule as opposed to the OT national theocracy, monarchy, and then the later, Maccabean theocratic monarchy.

And that conservatism was with respect to the liberal Sadduccees that simply rejected obvious doctrinal positions that were addressed in Scripture such as resurrection of the dead.

The Pharisees, by contrast, were a party that insisted on treating both the Bible and rabbinic commentary on the Bible as authoritative. They were entirely wrong, according to Jesus though, in adding to the Law. Oddly enough, the Pharisaical party seems to be strongly represented in the further developments of rabbinical thought and specifically seem closely related to Hasidic Jewry at least philosophically.

I offer that somewhat light analysis as a caution against oversimplifying things into "liberal" and "conservative" because those words sometimes turn into shibboleths instead of having a real meaning.

As to the post by Wade: I find such a post distasteful if it is not based on an actual event, even if the effort is to use sarcasm. That said, Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is famous for using the logical extreme to illustrate the vicious indifference one people group sometimes takes on towards another due to historical subjection and/or subordination.

Wade is merely making exactly the same point as Swift. Those who agree with efforts by Hunt and Patterson to use Calvinism as a wedge issue to create more fear, uncertainty, and doubt regarding which Christians are "real" Christians therefore should be allowed in "our" convention are essentially like the British that Swift intentionally and directly compared to baby eaters through his essay.

The real downside of arrogance is negativity. It fosters a negative-minded culture, not to mention the animosity it breeds. So, what is a negative-minded culture? Oh, not much, just one built atop hate and disrespect… nothing good can come from one. It also invariably leads to poor decision making. An arrogant man is rarely capable of making good decisions of a competitive nature. He does, however, create an air of superiority, sometimes one of invincibility. He becomes almost unapproachable. Such arrogance is intimidating to many people because of its power to stifle the air... purposeful of course to 'acquire and maintain'. In a sense, it is a tactic of a bully

It never ceases to amaze me what people REFUSE to believe about Patterson that he actually does. It is why he has managed to last so long. He is the Bill Clinton of the SBC. A charming rogue. I expect him to be elected SBC Prez again. Then write a book and make millions.

To some, he can do no wrong even when he does (a lot) wrong for many years.

BTW: I expect this post saved a lot of Calvinists their jobs. I hope you will thank Wade.

Lydia

Oh, just for balance, my friend, who was laid off at SBTS (wife and 3 kids) was NOT a Calvinist...could it be....???

Have you had the privilege of speaking with any your fellow faculty members today? I would think you have.

Please, do tell us what they said to you. Don't spare any details. If it helps you, I too, have had two lengthy conversations with SWBTS faculty members who seem nonchalant about the move to make Southwestern the anti-Southern, or if you will, the place Southern Baptists can go to get a non-Calvinist education.

If, and this is a big IF, Patterson backs down from what he told certain faculty members yesterday, it will be only to spite Wade Burleson. If that happens, you owe Wade thanks for your job. If it doesn't happen, and you are released, you owe him an apology for your previous comment anway. You are not always invited to every meeting.

I know you are in a spot. Particularly since you have learned what you learned today. I hope you sleep better tonight. It would help if you cleared your conscience and let the readers know the truth of what you discovered today.

You covered yourself legally no doubt by making it clear that your comment regarding Wade and Ben was hypothetical.Nevertheless, having read many of your comments, you would have to know that to make such an inflammatory hypothetical comment is extremely irresponsible and un-Christ like on your part. You owe Wade, Ben and all of Wade’s Blog readers an apology. What you have alleged regarding Wade and Ben, as hypothetical, is blatantly false and beneath the dignity of a lawyer and a Christian to make such a scurrilous, scandalous and sordid analogy. Please repent and apologize.

I have no way to know if this report is true and I have no way of doubting the veracity of the author and commentators. What I do know is back in the late 1970s, Dr. Patterson was both a mentor and President of my school. I took Advanced Seminar on Systematic Theology from him, meeting weekly at his home. He was always cordial and polite even though, theologically, we did not agree on all issues.

Dr. Patterson once told me, a Reformed Baptist (TULIP indeed), that he considered himself a 4.5 Calvinist assuming he could define the terms. At no time, though, has he ever showed to me anything but a good Christian heart.

If true then I am saddened he has come to this point in his spirit. If NOT true then I trust some apologies will be in order.

"I expect this post saved a lot of Calvinists their jobs. I hope you will thank Wade."

Oh, that was just too funny to have in the comment thread only once. I mean, I think Wade's an ok guy and all but I think it's funny to see people saying things that amount to "He said it so it must be true". Now, I have no idea about any goings on at SWBTS and Paige "Chicken-wing" Patterson, but it would take a little more than just someone saying they know something to prove it to me. I am an auditor. I live by the mantra "Tell me/show me/convince me". If I just took people's word for stuff I'd miss a lot of stuff in my work. That doesn't mean I think they're lying--that means I've got to corroborate their statements.

I've often enjoyed your comments because of their thoughtfulness and logical form. I've not always agreed with your premises or conclusions but have always enjoyed what you have to say. Until now.

A line has been crossed that I must address. My motive [which for obvious reasons will generally come into question on this site] is simply that a bit of the champion for the abused has come out in me. My motive is NOT to defend either person mentioned in your comment since both are capable of doing that for themselves. You will have to trust my integrity on that.

But...when something is said that moves from the actions performed by an individual, [Patterson meeting and addressing the firing of certain ones for certain reasons] which, by the way, he has every right to do since he's the one in charge, whether I agree with it or not, to an immoral anology which goes to character, I've got a problem.

Everything stated in the post had to do with the actions of a man and was stated correctly and I know that for a fact, though everyone is free to decide that for themselves.

But to use an immoral analogy which moves from actions to character, that also clouds the points made from a logical apples/oranges standpoint, is disingenuous at best and dishonorable at worst from my perspective and I am going to raise my voice and say "That's wrong."

I'm party to information where that kind of immoral innuendo has been used to try to discredit good men in places of leadership in the SBC in the past. And to try to pass it off as simply an analogy will not suffice for thinking people. Your logical mind has to be able to see the apple/orange failure which is so obvious to me.

I tried writing this privately because it comes so close to being a personal offense to me but I could not locate your e-mail address.

I have decided I can lay aside anything personal to do it this way. I appreciate you and love you in the Lord too much, without having met you personally, to NOT do this for your sake. Again, you will have to trust my integrity on this. I'm trusting your character to hear my intention as well as perhaps poorly worded sentences.

My purpose is not to hinder debate on any of the differences we might have with any issue or action or deed or principle or theological point. Quite the contrary, my purpose is to confront a wrong that DOES hinder such debate in my judgment. I would appreciate it if you would consider what I've said and respond however you choose. Thank you in advance.

whew! we sure can get worked up on here, hey? who among us really has a dog in this fight?? really... probably only any tulip at swbts? demanding apologies from him/her, stepping b/t to save a brother or sister, and pretty much typing things that no one reads or cares about (like this)...be honest, who is reading this "on the clock right now?"... hmmmm...next topic?

It is highly probable Wade Burleson and I will be at odds theologically util we get to heaven.

I stopped in to pick up some mail at the office and decided to check the comment thread or to see if Wade had retracted the content of his post...Then I saw the hypothetical comment relating to Wade and Ben...Next I see who wrote it.

Louis, you of all people. You know exactly how ignorant and stupid some people are. You know how some may take that and use it as truth. How could you have written that? How know how gossip grows away from the truth of any situation, especially a situation involving Christians.

Please ask Wade to remove it. Remove it before his wife, children, father or mother sees it. Remove it.

You have done a wrong thing here. You owe an apology to all involved.

I am often pretty rough on Wade and he often deserves it. But he does not deserve this. Nor does Ben.

Wade, I like Louis. I agree with him often, but not here. If he will not apologize properly, I apologize for him.

I know what it was. I stated as much. It is not my arrogance that is in play here. You get over your stupidity. BTW, you really are not the smartest cat in the world when it comes to theology. Just though I would throw that in so you will see the difference in what I said to Louis and when I am being arrogant.

well, i've been scrolling around to find out exactly what this louis character wrote that has everyone so upset and in a tizzy and i finally found it I think. Sounds like louis is trying to confess something to all his bloggin' buddies...hmmm? louis?

"Some of the professors present at the meeting included men who specifically informed administration of their beliefs at the time of their hiring, and they were told at the time their beliefs were not a problem."

This does not say that there were multiple meetings in which Patterson met with the various faculty from the school of theology. It clearly implies (and plainly states) that there was ONE meeting (Wade said it by noting "THE meeting"). But, there was no such meeting, according to Dr. Welty, and others.

Thus, until Wade (at best) acknowledges that he got the facts wrong, or (at worst) lied about what events actually took place, I see no reason to take this post seriously.

People call Wade sometimes and tell him things. He does not deliver his sources to their executioners, much to his credit, even when that might save him from the 'attacks' on his character we see here.

As for Wade, he stands up for the under-dog, at his own risk. He very likely is doing that again, and the penalty is all this mockslander. So, good for Wade.Someone felt that they could trust him and called him or contacted him. Wade intervened in a manner not fully understood yet, nor may every be. And I have a feeling Wade has helped some people by doing this. That feeling comes from his track record of trying to help others at his own expense.

Wade owes me no explanations. His credit is good.

Whoever got helped, know that it was a Christian man who cared to intervene possibly at his own risk.

Louis,I remind you that you posted comments that Martin Bradley had done something unethical or dishonest in his work for the SBC. This was one of the many myths of the CR that still are being passed around. I even gave a reference from Paul Pressler's book refuting those charges. You have not admited you were wrong or apologized. You have done the same thing you accuse of Wade of doing. Before you start accusing others you need to look at the beam in your own eye.Ron West

I'm a visitor to your site, having come from tallskinnykiwi.blogspot.com. I have nothing to add nor do I have a dog in this fight, so to speak. I simply want to offer a bit of a story and the promise of prayers.

When I was at Asbury Theological Seminary two years ago, the president there got canned. Big time. There was infighting, blogging, lies (not saying that's what's happening here; I have no idea), a student contacted the accreditation board and ATS got put on probation, students wouldn't talk to students because "sides" had emerged. And for those of us who tried to be "peace makers," we got the bullets from the cross fire. I don't know what the results of said actions will be at SWBTS, but I just want to throw out there that I'll be praying for all involved, and encouraging all to do the same no matter how you feel in regard to the situation; that justice comes where it needs to come, that mercy is mixed with it, and that those ill-effected by the decisions of boards and powers that be will find healing in the merciful arms of both fellow believers and our Lord.

I do not know, if in the future SBC Voices might delete the post of Ben Cole. So I am posting that in here. Please forgive for length issues. All for a good cause. :-)

Ben Cole’s “Exit Strategy” post from 12 July 2008

Whether I have delayed this post out of an ever-increasing disinterest in all things Southern Baptist, or out of the sheer orneriness of forcing impatient readers to wait, or because there is some sense of sorrow and loss because of the things I must now write, I do not know.

The facts, however, are these: For four years, I have planned an exit from Southern Baptist life, beginning with my pursuit of a doctoral degree at Baylor University. That exit was forestalled because of one phonecall — received past midnight from Alabama pastor C.B. Scott — that urged me to fight the good fight stirring up on account of a famously recalcitrant mission board trustee and his opposition to exclusionary policies governing the appointment of international missionaries. Once I listened to C.B., who made me promise not to allow the Baptist brouhaha to distract me from my academic pursuits, I launched a counter-offensive that has become, to at least some degree, notorious.

The objective was simple. Neutralize the influence of fundamentalist, landmarkist, legalistic theologies that trace their most recent incarnation to Paige Patterson and his graciously submissive wife, Dorothy. Patterson is a politically shrewd and quasi-cannibalistic junkyard dog. His wife is one part old lace and two parts arsenic. An invitation to high tea with the pair can result in a trusteeship or a tombstone.

To oppose Paige Patterson’s fundamentalist agenda requires stamina of the sort that few men possess, especially pastors. The fact that most Southern Baptist pastors cannot extend their pastoral tenures beyond 18 months makes you immediately aware that the convention — which is comprised of pastors — does not have the intestinal fortitude to fight anything for very long.

It also requires what Kierkegaard referred to as the temporary suspension of the ethical. To stick a hog, you have to get in the mud. You have to be willing to expose, confront, accuse, and substantiate. You have to be willing to say publicly what most Southern Baptists in-the-know say privately. You have to stop whispering and start shouting.

I suppose that C.B. knew that my days in Southern Baptist life were short-lived. Unlike many of my contemporaries, I do not desire the pastoral office. I have served Southern Baptist churches because of gifting — both natural and spiritual — as well as a love of teaching. The churches where I have served will unanimously attest to both my teaching gifts and my pastoral deficiencies. I have evangelized because it was required of me. I have visited the sick and shut-ins because Holy Writ had thus enjoined me. I have blessed the baked beans, consecrated the babies, immersed the repentant, and interred the dead. At times there has been a sense that this work of mine was a holy calling. At others, I have felt something like a medicine man full of pious, rote incantations and mesmerizing magic.

What I do know — the thing that is truly in my belly — is politics. Not only in the practical art but in the abstract theory. As I have said on numerous occasions, the only difference between a Baptist pastor and a politician is in the intellectual honesty of the politician. He will announce unashamedly the nature of his craft. A Baptist pastor, on the other hand, must pretend as if he gets his every order straight from the Almighty.

A few weeks hence I will conclude a chapter of my life. I will resume the ecclesial retreat I commenced four years ago, assured that some of my goals in denominational life have been met while others remain a distant dream. I leave, however, with a few observations, reservations, and predictions about the Southern Baptist Convention and the personalities who have driven her to the precipice of irrelevance. To enumerate all of these would require more time than I am willing to commit, though I will offer a few.

1. The SBC will not look the same ten years from now. This is immediately obvious on the surface. Paige Patterson is not immortal, and the mongrel theologians he has sired through thirty years of doctrinal inbreeding will not be able to carry the movement he energized once his has received his eternal reward. Already the brightest of his protégés are distancing themselves from his ever-narrowing agenda. Already, Al Mohler’s influence is surpassing the Pattersons’. The climbing enrollment at Southern Seminary is perhaps the greatest example of Patterson’s diminished ability to raise up his denominational “green berets.” When Southwestern’s convention booths have had motorcycles and camouflage netting and other silly gimicks, Southern’s looks respectable, academic, and appealing. The students have noticed the difference, and have moved toward Louisville in increasing number.

2. My book, which is near completion, will not become required reading at any Southern Baptist seminary, but it will be read more thoroughly than most required texts. The working title, “A Hill on Which To Kill,” might not survive editorial oversight, and I will take the next several months to rework and reword a few sections myself.

3. The IMB policies regarding tongues and baptism will not be repealed by the trustees, but it won’t matter. They will be applied with the same consistency and intensity that Southern Baptist seminaries apply their policies that all students abstain from the consumption of alcoholic beverages. I have found humorous the numbers of Southwestern students alone that have met me off campus to discuss the controversy, or give me some tip, or ask some question over a pint of lager or other illegal libation. Like Nicodemus in the night, they have escaped the Pharisaical cloister to experience the freedom of the gospel. Were I to release their names — which I will not — the enrollment of the Fort Worth seminary might suffer an even greater downturn. That is, of course, if the president was consistent. Most of us know by now, however, that he is not.

4. Johnny Hunt will have as much success bringing “younger pastors” into the SBC as Andy Stanley has bringing “older pastors” to his Catalyst conference. The convention is experiencing an antetransjordanian cull, if you will. The generation that left Egypt will die off, indeed they must die off before something better can come to fruition.

5. The cry among many Southern Baptists for a less restrictive statement of faith is rooted in a hunger for a more apostolic Christianity. Look for new churches to adopt the ancient creeds as their confessional framework rather than those of late 20th century genesis.

When I landed in Indianapolis for the annual meeting this past June, I was overwhelmed by a sense of nostalgia. For a decade and four I have attended the Southern Baptist Convention. I’ve mastered the convention polity. I’ve memorized the bylaws. I’ve drafted many more motions and resolutions than those reflected in the annual reports. It has been a fun learning experience, but I have determined that the SBC is better without me, and I without it.

I’ve experienced things that few men my age experience. I’ve received an education that seminary cannot provide. And through it all I’ve seen Baptists at their worst and their best. When a man reaches 30 years of age, he has choices to make. I have determined that I will not be among the many 50 year old pastors who look back on their lives and wish they’d taken a different course. Today, when young men and women tell me they feel “called” to the ministry, I grieve. And then I remember that most seminarians do not see what I’ve seen, hear what I’ve heard, or smell what I’ve smelled inside the rotten gut of denominational power.

Disenchanted? Perhaps. Disinterested? Almost. Disengaged? Absolutely.

And with this, I bid you adieu. No more blogging at SBCOutpost. No more resolutions or motions or messenger cards. No more vituperative indictments of bloated bureaucrats or zealous advocacy for denominational reform. A mind, they say, is a terrible thing to waste.

I missed all this history. This is to preserve this post. I am hoping Pastor Wade will not delete that comment(Post). To me, it was educational and an eye opener. This is the first time I am coming across Ben Cole's posts. I have never read them before.

Also I get enthused when I come across things for the first time. Sorry if it upsets you.

I do take your comments seriously. Including the comments you made on Debbie's blog recently.

I actually pondered all the verses you quoted and asked myself questions for each of them. I am convicted lot of times. Not just from your comments.

I believe I am more hard on my self than others. So I am not put off by your comments.

About my activity on other blogs, of which you commented:

I never was interested in SBC blogs. I am an engineer by training. All my life is spent on perusing technical works and papers.

For some reason I got introduced to watching fbcjax. I have been listening to Pastor Mac for 14 months. Every day, I would spend about 2 to 3 hours listening to his recorded podcasts.

My curiosity is what killed me here.

In Pastor Mac's sermons, he would complain about people blogging about him and casting him in bad light. I did not pursue this line of thinking for almost 1 year. But in the last two months, when Pastor Mac who seemed to be in deep anguish over bloggers, got me to investigate.

I ended up on fbc jac watchdog blog.

When I first came to that blog site, I was visibly upset and shaken.

I wanted to get to the truth behind the posts. So I spent about 2 months, methodically going over the posts and comments.

Then I became convinced that things are not right there.

What things?

Only two things come to my mind. One is the Sheri Klouda incident, where Pastor Mac attributed wrong sayings of Sheri Klouda. The record proved this.

The other aspect, was the bylaws changes in fbcjax: how they went about doing it. Moving from congregational rule to an elder led rule, without prior discussion and notification of the members.

I am not interested in politics at all. This aspect disturbed me.

For now, I do not watch fbc jax. I felt I had to comment on Watchdog's posts, mainly because for over 14 months, I had listened to Pastor Mac's sermons (each of them more then 7 times) and I was a party to what happened (at least as an observer). I also recorded all the fbcjax broadcasts. This was done, mainly because I loved fbc jax music. They have the best music and singing in all the churches I visited either physically or virtually.

I think you are a little brighter than that CB, since we have corresponded personally before. You are no idiot and I believe it's pretty obvious to you what I'm saying. I'm not going to play this game with you again, but sometimes this innocent "what did I do?" stuff just doesn't ring true, especially from and to someone with a good intellect.You know what you do.

Looks like Rob and CB are tag-teaming. Don't take them seriously. They represent some of the best examples of negative Baptist 'contentiousness'. Their behavior is interesting, but not worth your response.Their comments are not Christian.Their comments are not civil.

Best to ignore them.Thanks for sharing about Ben Cole.He seems a very thoughtful and literate young man. One hopes that he will have a happier experience away from the poisonous atmosphere now prevalent in the SBC.

You know what CB? I hope you understand that lack you are expressing when it comes to you.I request you don't question my manhood, because you actually know better. There is no need to play games with me. We have corresponded personally. Your 1:07 comment was a little less than honest, isn't it? I expected a little better from you actually.

"Some Sovereign Grace folks believe that sharing the gospel with lost people is like standing before rows of tomb stones preaching to the dead ones in the graves; they seem to believe that a lost person can no more hear the preacher and understand his words than those dead bodies laying in the graves."

You can lay off Thy Peace. I am the one who gave the link to Cole's exit post. Thy Peace only made it official with the html thingies and then posted it. If you want to play Torquemada, do it with me.

But I won't recant.

CB, You have the SBC Patterson tactic down pat. You learned well. But I don't think it comes cross well in blogging. You need that gravely rustic Tom Sawyer/Boss Hogg thing he has going. You can only do that in person.

this place is like a cyber bar...when i went to bed last night the same people were on here jawing/typing with each other. no wonder you people "get your feelin's hurt so much" you spend all the night long looking for some kind of "emotional connection" with each other (CB and the lady??) don't you have families? go talk to real people! OH NO....I'M DOINNGGGG ITTTT!!! :(

I'm just tired of it. It happened with L's, now again with Thy Peace. Heart shots taken on the ones with the sweetest hearts. There are more challenging targets that could be taken around here, and there are maybe some hunters who need to be shot at themselves.

There are more than a couple of wildebeasts and and wart hogs and other critters wandering in and out this pasture. But some of the great white hunters choose to shoot the lambs instead.

My opinion, if you'd really like to know, is you're (Charles Page, Collierville, Tennessee) a pervert with an unhealthy fascination with homosexual behavior and pedophilia and a personal vendetta against Dr. and Mrs. Rogers.

I would like to state for the record, the people whom I am currently listening to and reading of:

Pastor Wade: Love his sermons and posts.

Tom Ascol: Web posts are very clear. He is very simple in elucidating truths.

James White: I like his questioning and discovery. I do not always understand him, but I attempt to.

Ravi Zacharias: A very clear thinker and speaker. I relate to him totally. His past and his trajectory of coming to Christ. I am humbled by this man, who can bring complex subjects to simple realm.

Cindy Kunsman: I profit much from her blog.

Paula Fether: I learn much from her blog too.

Cheryl Schatz: A true researcher. Her posts are well written.

Fbc Jax Watchdog: I understand lot of people think he is bad. But he is actually very good. He is not a trouble maker. He is only questioning. I always felt lot of the issues at fbcjax could have been easily resolved with tolerance of dissent and openness.

Debbie Kaufman: I read all her posts. She is a simple person and very kind and gracious.

Lydia: I value her comments. Even her questions reveal so much.

Christa Brown: Stop Baptist Predators blog site. A very sad indictment of religious leaders. This aspect is not unique to baptists, as we all know.